|
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1486620)
Are you really this naive? Do you genuinely expect the entire survey result to EVER be completely aligned with the desires of the group? That is why this argument is so ridiculous. There is no way in hell that we could ever get 12,000 pilots to agree on any simple subject much less a complex document like the contract. Especially when there are 2 disparate groups involved as fDAL and fNWA. What I find alarming is that you seem to think Caplinger can deliver exactly what it is you advocate. If he could, I'd donate all my net worth to his campaign for POTUS, because he would be the best thing since Jesus.
T; I don't think the survey results were even REMOTELY aligned with the TA. |
Originally Posted by boog123
(Post 1486004)
I always love how some DAL guys just love to say "NRT is dead". No clue of the actual economics, treaties, pacts, efficiencies, history, loyalty. Just, it was NWA's, so let's hope it goes away. Stupid. Do you have any clue how many pilot jobs would be lost if the operation went away. Be careful what you "hope" for.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1486120)
We replaced a bunch of 50 seaters that only had a few years left with long term viable jumbo RJs.. extending the regional model lifespan.
FAR117 |
OK, who's going to be the first to send this medical condition to the Company for verification?
Some of us might not want to be cured all that quickly. The patient had an infection with Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Cordell says. So when he ate or drank a bunch of starch — a bagel, pasta or even a soda — the yeast fermented the sugars into ethanol, and he would get drunk. Essentially, he was brewing beer in his own gut. Cordell and McCarthy reported the case of "auto-brewery syndrome" a few months ago in the International Journal of Clinical Medicine. When we first read the case study, we were more than a little skeptical. It sounded crazy, a phenomenon akin to spontaneous combustion. I mean, come on: Could a person's gut really generate that much ethanol? Brewer's yeast is in a whole host of foods, including breads, wine and, of course, beer (hence, the name). The critters usually don't do any harm. They just flow right through us. Some people even take Saccharomyces as a probiotic supplement. But it turns out that in rare cases, the yeasty beasts can indeed take up long-term residency in the gut and possibly cause problems, says Dr. Joseph Heitman, a microbiologist at Duke University. Apparently a person can take antibiotics to kill all the microbes, then use craft beer as a probiotic and voila 24 / 7 beer factory in the lower gut. This explains a lot of things. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1486158)
I'm thinking tsquare is holding out on us. He had to have taken more than 2 pictures. Who won the game? I don't remember. ;) |
Originally Posted by FTB
Besides, how am I supposed to really believe that we got GK, Boeing, the Board, et. al. to risk all of this opportunity based on whether or not the dumb pilots voted in the first offer from the company on TA2012 and if they said no then oh well, lets keep those CR2s 4EVER! ?
So use the 717s you're going to acquire to get the pilots to say yes to more jumbo RJs and use that as leverage to get rid of the 50-seaters you hate. Tri-Winning. What say you or RonRon?
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1486573)
You made the point about acquiring 739s and not CRJ. So far at least, those aircraft were not being purchased as added capacity and 739s aren't exactly the size of aircraft you would use to replace RJ lift (less frequency, bigger aircraft)
As to what makes a good 50-seater replacement, that all depends on networks whims with frequency. I've seen the 88 be used to replace 50-seaters and vice versa and I've also seen that some 50-seater markets have just up and vanished into thin air. Capacity discipline vs frequency.
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1486573)
Next issue is the board, Boeing etc not caring about what the pilots did with the TA. You can't have it both ways, either they needed us to make the deal happen (the deal being all the 717's, instead of less or another type of narrow body) or they didn't, which meant we had no leverage wrt that deal.
A) DAL wasn't going to let those things go (especially if they land at another airline) and Boeing and SWA were probably not going to make the deal contingent on what the pilots did on their first TA vote. I don't think it was a pilot leverage thing, I just don't think we factored in to that external deal. This is all a loosing battle as it stands right now. Pay trumps small jet scope. DAL could've done the 50-4-76 swap with a pay for scope deal- but I think the 717s were a cheaper and more convenient option. B) The internal deal that DAL offered was a different thing. They used the 717s instead of doing a pay for scope. The whole idea that needed to rush this through is where we had leverage and we could've sat on it. We didn't have to be in a hurry like the 08 merger, rather, we should have concentrated on getting this contract right and preventing bad precedents. What we'd done though is thrown a wrench into the 50-4-76 swap but let's be honest, guys weren't going to turn down pay to hold the line on small jet scope. I get that. But that's why I get irritated with DALPA calling small jet scope in TA 2012 a win. It's far far from a win and it shouldn't be celebrated. DALPA should, just like it would with those who demand to sell vacations, hold the line on small jet scope and it should be in the business of not appeasing pilots who say "well how much is holding that line going to co$t me?!?" and convincing them to hold this and every scope line.
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1486573)
So I think that leaves the acquisition of more jumbo RJ's as the sole leverage (in your argument) to get the contract. Who knows, you could be spot on, but it is also only a theory and one based on less hard information than the MEC had. Again, I am not saying it isn't 100 percent spot on (who really knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men ie RA) there is just no way to say with 100 percent certainty that was the case.
I think this is where Slow's point about "religion" is spot on. You certainly can't prove your theory and I can't prove that it is wrong, so I am not going to tell you that you are wrong. You haven't proved that Slow's story is disingenuous either, so am I to believe the Catholic or the Methodist? We can disagree all day long about the tangible data of whether it was enough, early enough, whether we should have waited etc, but it does annoy me when the MEC gets slammed for giving their best guess on how things may play out, but it is ok here to turn theory into pseudo statements of fact based on less data and to try and sell that to the pilots who frequent this board. Anyway, I am going to enjoy my day off without getting into the creation museum debate. I use what management has said since we signed this contract as proof they didn't want to keep the 50-seaters and that they wanted more mainline aircraft (which btw they consider to be anything with a two-class which is both outsourced jumbo RJs and mainline jets). They then also add that this refleet, pilot productivity and reduced profit sharing is how they pay for the contract. I don't think that statement would've gone over well in May of 2012, no? I think what many of us believed prior to the contract has been affirmed after the contract and I don't believe it's "religion" or "faith" to do so as much as I believe calling it that is a way to dismiss the angst against the results. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1486636)
Catholic, Baptist, Methodist or Moakism, it's all religion. ;) :D
(crowd in unison) Yes, We are all individuals I just took the 717 off the table when considering Contract 2012 scope. I think you are correct, there was no real tie in ... but ... to make the ratio which justified the NexGen allowance palatable, they needed something and the 717 fit. |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1486477)
I hear tsquare doesn't share though. :D
Carl |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1486583)
FTB,
Glad you brought it up. I don't have the answer, but have been wanting us to dig here. The Next Gen aircraft Delta has been buying were quite a bit more efficient, have improved maintenance specs and are not as performance limited as their predecessors. Delta wanted the new version ... and mostly wanted to keep their other large RJ's. It has been a long time since I dug up the numbers. Current Block Hours Costs including CapEx, Fuel, Crew, Maintenance, Insurance, Taxes: 717 - $5,033* (Hawaiian) DC950 - $4,206 737-700- $4,483 (Delta) 737-700- $4,175 (Southwest) MD90 - $4,829 A320 - $4,836 MD88 - $4,636 737-800-$4,981 Source - Oliver Wyman, PlaneStats.com, using form 41 data, reported 5 September 2013 * Delta's costs should be lower when reported due to lower CapEx component & longer stage length. |
Here's the "Delta Representation Thread" by Monty Python
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:41 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands